[Taxacom] Tetrastigma tuberculatum: nom. illeg.?
jcclark-lists at earthlink.net
Tue Aug 21 08:49:39 CDT 2007
On 2007-08-21 06:01, Boggan, John wrote:
> I thought I knew the Code pretty well but overlooked Art. 58.1. Despite
> being published as an avowed combination, Tetrastigma tuberculatum
> Latiff 2001 is apparently to be considered a nom. nov. for Cissus
> tuberculata Blume (non Jacq.), with the same type.
I guess I know I'm getting old when I can no longer rely on, uh, what's
> Unfortunately there's more: at the same time he made the "combination",
> Latiff synonymized several species under T. tuberculatum: Cissus
> mutabilis Bl. (1825), Tetrastigma mutabile (Bl.) Planch. (1887),
> Tetrastigma encephalospermum Ridl. (1926), Vitis kunstleri King (1896),
> Tetrastigma kunstleri (King) Craib (1926), Vitis rafflesiae Miq.
> (1863-64) & Tetrastigma rafflesiae (Miq.) Planch. (1887). If I'm looking
> at these names and dates right, he should have taken up T. mutabile
> (Bl.) Planch. as the correct name for this taxon, as Cissus mutabilis
> Bl. (1825) is the next oldest name after Cissus tuberculata Bl.
> (actually published at the same time) and therefore has priority over T.
> tuberculatum Latiff (2001) IF all these taxa are combined under one
Based on Article 58.1, that would seem to be the case, since the nom.
nov. only dates to 2001.
Curtis Clark http://www.csupomona.edu/~jcclark/
Director, I&IT Web Development +1 909 979 6371
University Web Coordinator, Cal Poly Pomona
More information about the Taxacom